They definitely write in a manner designed to confuse and cause arguments.

 

I really wish I hadn't commented. Steve Dieters is out in force again making sure to find the one tiny aspect of my statement he claims is "absolutely false" forcing me to explain in more detail what I meant by it and completely ignoring the ten other things stated that disprove him. That guy is a genius when it comes to shifting focus. He should be a politician.

 

He is always harping on the taxing district but ignoring the current plans that will cover the costs which is parking and a portion of the property taxes are forgone on abatements to pay for it.  I believe that is around 7.5%.  Also another benefit to all these new buildings coming a long is even though a lot are abated, they are still giving 25% of their taxes to the Cincinnati School District, and I don't believe those are capped.

 

Property taxes are most definitely capped, so abating those properties in OTR and downtown for 12 years absolutely does not cost any other neighborhood in the city any more money, is that correct?  Because since property taxes are capped, other neighborhoods don't pay more to make up for it.  Once those abatements start running out, the rest of the city will pay less and less as more money is flowing from downtown and OTR.  Now that is a benefit to the whole city, no?  I wonder what his response to that would be?

 

Because of the property tax rollback, each individual abatement has no affect on the City's bottom line. The greatest benefit is the income taxes of the people living along the line and the jobs created along the line.

I think the comment from Curt Parrott is more instructive of where the sensible middle 60% of the population lies. He says that he sees the growth along the route and can't believe that all of the income generated won't more than pay for itself. And he's a former critic. Our campaign to get out the facts regarding the economic impact is effectual. Nevermind the SD's of the world. They're never gonna change and we don't need them to.

They definitely write in a manner designed to confuse and cause arguments.

 

I really wish I hadn't commented. Steve Dieters is out in force again making sure to find the one tiny aspect of my statement he claims is "absolutely false" forcing me to explain in more detail what I meant by it and completely ignoring the ten other things stated that disprove him. That guy is a genius when it comes to shifting focus. He should be a politician.

 

He is always harping on the taxing district but ignoring the current plans that will cover the costs which is parking and a portion of the property taxes are forgone on abatements to pay for it.  I believe that is around 7.5%.  Also another benefit to all these new buildings coming a long is even though a lot are abated, they are still giving 25% of their taxes to the Cincinnati School District, and I don't believe those are capped.

 

Property taxes are most definitely capped, so abating those properties in OTR and downtown for 12 years absolutely does not cost any other neighborhood in the city any more money, is that correct?  Because since property taxes are capped, other neighborhoods don't pay more to make up for it.  Once those abatements start running out, the rest of the city will pay less and less as more money is flowing from downtown and OTR.  Now that is a benefit to the whole city, no?  I wonder what his response to that would be?

 

The only healthy response to Steve Dieters is to have him change his diaper and get out of the house for a bit. He wrote the textbook for Concern Troll 101.

Chris Wetterich @ChrisCinciBiz  ·  21m 21 minutes ago

Commentary: Cincinnati is dropping the ball on the next phase of the streetcar http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/blog/2015/03/commentary-city-dropping-the-ball-on-next-phase-of.html?ana=twt&page=all …

They definitely write in a manner designed to confuse and cause arguments.

 

I really wish I hadn't commented. Steve Dieters is out in force again making sure to find the one tiny aspect of my statement he claims is "absolutely false" forcing me to explain in more detail what I meant by it and completely ignoring the ten other things stated that disprove him. That guy is a genius when it comes to shifting focus. He should be a politician.

 

He is always harping on the taxing district but ignoring the current plans that will cover the costs which is parking and a portion of the property taxes are forgone on abatements to pay for it.  I believe that is around 7.5%.  Also another benefit to all these new buildings coming a long is even though a lot are abated, they are still giving 25% of their taxes to the Cincinnati School District, and I don't believe those are capped.

 

Property taxes are most definitely capped, so abating those properties in OTR and downtown for 12 years absolutely does not cost any other neighborhood in the city any more money, is that correct?  Because since property taxes are capped, other neighborhoods don't pay more to make up for it.  Once those abatements start running out, the rest of the city will pay less and less as more money is flowing from downtown and OTR.  Now that is a benefit to the whole city, no?  I wonder what his response to that would be?

 

Because of the property tax rollback, each individual abatement has no affect on the City's bottom line. The greatest benefit is the income taxes of the people living along the line and the jobs created along the line.

 

I think supporters can hang their hat more on this with the fiercer opponents who dig down to the abatements, like Mr. Dieters on cincinnat.com.  He says something a long the lines of "Cost of abatements, Washington Park..., keep in mind I said COST."  How is it a cost if it isn't taking a dime away from the city.  That makes absolutely no sense at all.  And what does a public park have anything to do with the streetcar?  Do proponents actually tout Washington Park as development spurred by the streetcar?  I have never heard that once in my life.

 

Keep in mind, revenue that never existed with future revenues generated being abated by the city is not a "cost" to the city.  I think I am going to work on a project of my own with a spreadsheet, etc. to show development dollars spent within two blocks of the streetcar line, 2 years before it was announced, the years it was in limbo, and the 1.2 years or so since it was a full go.  I guarantee development has kicked up a lot since the final nail in COAST's coffin was nailed in December of 2013, probably close to 50% or more compared to the years before.

 

Then, there are economic models and money multiplier effects which are very much statistically true which show the economic impact as a function of wages and other items.

 

The key here is, showing the increase in in spending since the streetcar was announced full go compared to years past and years in limbo.  Then people can't come and say, oh well it would have happened anyways.  Well, they could say that, but they will look dumber and dumber for it. 

 

Once the data is all in place, we can just add as we go and we can all get a PhD. in Economics from UC for the thesis  8-) :-D

Steve Deiters should be running a lemonade stand -- you know, where you buy powdered mix and blend it with water and ice as it is needed, where everyone pays in cash and doesn't get any lemonade if he doesn't, where you charge more than it costs to make the lemonade, and raise your price if business is good and lower it if it's bad. If it rains, you don' t make lemonade that day. When summer's over, you go back to school.

 

That's an enterprise that is equal to Deiter's financial sophistication.

My major frustration is his inability to understand the difference between a budget estimate and an actual construction budget. Estimates are great and all for gauging a project's costs, but are meaningless in the end when a real bid based on real designs based on real conditions is settled upon. He keeps going back to the original estimates to insist the project has, "been over budget since day 1 by 22 million."

 

One of the very first things I ever read on the internet in 1997 or 1998 was a detailed article panning the western expansion of the Portland MAX light rail system (hardly anything on the subject was posted online at that time).  It caused me to remain skeptical of the light rail mode for several years.  At some point I ran across the article again in 2001 or 2002 (probably when he chimed in in opposition to our Metro Moves plan) and it turned out it had been written by Randall O'Toole.  I had been fooled at age 19 or 20 by that notorious Koch bros lackey. 

 

Now I spot those kinds of phony arguments, no matter the subject, in an instant.  But people like Steve Dieters and this metro's legions of 700 WLW listeners are deep into adulthood and keep getting tricked over and over again by the same old techniques.  When you point them toward the facts, they entrench themselves even deeper into their false beliefs. 

 

 

^ That's very logical, especially with respect to the streetcar. The opponents are into twenty-mile commutes to homogenous neighborhoods, driving two miles for a half-gallon of milk or a loaf of bread. They're heavily invested in big yards, a fleet of cars and the ritual of caring for them. And they're often mortgaged to the hilt and many owe more than the properties are worth.

 

So when somone gets on Cincinnati.com and talks the merits of a car-light or car-free lifestyle, walking to work, renting a nice place that you can walk away from if the perfect job in Austin comes along, carefree Saturdays and Sundays to do what ever you want instead of being a farmer and having enough disposable income to eat out a lot and travel. When your typical road warrior reads or  hears that, he just wants to burrow-in and batten-down the hatches against a future which, at some level, he propbably no longer believes in or can get out of. I think there's a fair amount of jealousy involved. And a salve for jealousy is to belittle what you know you can't have. Or at least can't have easily. Be happy you're not one of them.

It's also about being proven wrong. Some people so invested in their lifestyle that acknowledging another lifestyle has some merit for other people means having to admit their absolutism was the wrong attack. And some people would rather fall on their own swords and die than admit they were wrong.

^ That's very logical, especially with respect to the streetcar. The opponents are into twenty-mile commutes to homogenous neighborhoods, driving two miles for a half-gallon of milk or a loaf of bread. They're heavily invested in big yards, a fleet of cars and the ritual of caring for them. And they're often mortgaged to the hilt and many owe more than the properties are worth.

 

So when somone gets on Cincinnati.com and talks the merits of a car-light or car-free lifestyle, walking to work, renting a nice place that you can walk away from if the perfect job in Austin comes along, carefree Saturdays and Sundays to do what ever you want instead of being a farmer and having enough disposable income to eat out a lot and travel. When your typical road warrior reads or  hears that, he just wants to burrow-in and batten-down the hatches against a future which, at some level, he propbably no longer believes in or can get out of. I think there's a fair amount of jealousy involved. And a salve for jealousy is to belittle what you know you can't have. Or at least can't have easily. Be happy you're not one of them.

 

I believe this is also the root of the "if you want transit, take the bus" argument. I rarely sense that people who say this are genuinely suggesting that someone take the bus if they want to loosen the reins of car living. "Take the bus" comes off as a challenge to do something distasteful and degrading; a penance to be paid for veering outside of the suburban lifestyle. It also speaks to the financial criticism of rail transit as an expensive toy: it's hard to endorse rail at any cost when you think urban living doesn't have value.

 

 

Seelbach on twitter:

Working on motion directing City Administration to study ways to fund phase 1b of the @Cincy_Streetcar project. Lets see our options.

They definitely write in a manner designed to confuse and cause arguments.

 

I really wish I hadn't commented. Steve Dieters is out in force again making sure to find the one tiny aspect of my statement he claims is "absolutely false" forcing me to explain in more detail what I meant by it and completely ignoring the ten other things stated that disprove him. That guy is a genius when it comes to shifting focus. He should be a politician.

 

IKWYM, although I wouldn't characterize him as a genius!  He's a sophist.  I finally realized that it only serves to edify his ego by engaging in dialogue with him.  Who the eff is he anyway?  He's a nobody, and only one of maybe 3 or so opponents who bother commenting anymore on The Enquirer's purposefully-inflammatory, hit-seeking streetcar articles.  Streetcar supporters are the ones giving the paper the hits they crave -- there aren't enough opponents who still care enough to argue about it.

^ That's very logical, especially with respect to the streetcar. The opponents are into twenty-mile commutes to homogenous neighborhoods, driving two miles for a half-gallon of milk or a loaf of bread. They're heavily invested in big yards, a fleet of cars and the ritual of caring for them. And they're often mortgaged to the hilt and many owe more than the properties are worth.

 

So when somone gets on Cincinnati.com and talks the merits of a car-light or car-free lifestyle, walking to work, renting a nice place that you can walk away from if the perfect job in Austin comes along, carefree Saturdays and Sundays to do what ever you want instead of being a farmer and having enough disposable income to eat out a lot and travel. When your typical road warrior reads or  hears that, he just wants to burrow-in and batten-down the hatches against a future which, at some level, he propbably no longer believes in or can get out of. I think there's a fair amount of jealousy involved. And a salve for jealousy is to belittle what you know you can't have. Or at least can't have easily. Be happy you're not one of them.

 

Just because their lifestyle doesn't appeal to us, and some of them oppose the streetcar, I wouldn't presume they're necessarily leading lives of quiet desperation and harbor secret envy of urbanists.  I could believe they're jealous of the money that's spent on transit and would want it spent on road repairs instead.  Besides, there seem to be plenty of streetcar opponents living in neighborhoods like Hyde Park.  They're not all in exurbia.

 

The more the merrier but I'm glad not everybody wants to live in the urban core.  To each his own. 

Although he may have legitimate arguments as a lot of opponents do, he mostly harps on costs.  It is like an old girlfriend who brings up past arguments.  As long as this project is under construction and running, there are going to be people who complain.  I would love to hear people complain about other things.

 

In my own mind and I believe in almost all supporters minds, people know that the streetcar is one of the best keys to accelerating redevelopment in downtown and Over the Rhine.  Development at a faster rate puts more money in the coffers now, more jobs for construction workers with many of them most likely local, more activity on the streets which decreases crime, etc.

 

An interesting study would be measuring the amount of police on the beat at any given time in OTR.  Just throwing numbers but if that number halved, from say 50 to 25 police officers, if arrests are down, murders, robberies, etc., there is a very real cost savings to that as well.  You could probably make a pretty neat study on all the variables.  Then you put the streetcar in December 2013 through the present, and measure against past data over the same, say 1.5 year increments, and I am sure it would show good improvements.

I blocked SD on FB some time ago so I never even see his comments. I finally did this after inviting him down for lunch and beers on me to personally tour the route. He declined several times. That's all you need to know. I would say block and of more would be the best way of marginalizing.

Deiters is old school Cincinnati personified, almost cartoonishly so.

Folks, if you like the idea of fast, convenient train service to Chicago, I need you to take action to speak up and save the Hoosier State:

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,29307.msg747425.html#msg747425

The mayor's Communications Director (?) still rooting for the streetcar's failure:

The mayor's Communications Director (?) still rooting for the streetcar's failure:

 

Gotta start beating those negativity drums again with Seelbach's effort to focus on Phase 1b ramping up.

CBRE's 2015 Market Outlook for Cincinnati:

 

"Downtown’s recent growth is phenomenal, investment is increasing and the anticipation of the streetcar has increased development along its route. The live, work and play dynamic is accelerating and transforming our city in to a 24-hour walkable urban environment"

 

http://www.cbre.us/o/cincinnati/real-estate-news/Pages/CBRE-Announces-2015-Market-Outlook-for-Greater-Cincinnati.aspx

 

 

Parking update- http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/Government/2015/03/09/rhine-parking-plan/24643711/

The mayor's Communications Director (?) still rooting for the streetcar's failure:

 

The new transpo guy in the referenced article reeks of someone who is fundamentally skeptical of their project. It illustrates the idea that if you want something to fail, it will. That can be applied to so many things in life.

Parking update- http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/Government/2015/03/09/rhine-parking-plan/24643711/

 

I feel in terms of fulfilling the needs of residents, this is a stopgap measure. In order to relieve the need for parking for more and more people as the population increases and more businesses open, the best solution is to continue to expand the streetcar into a light rail tram system, increasing the ability of people to park elsewhere and ride the tram in, or get rid of the need for cars in the area.

The mayor's Communications Director (?) still rooting for the streetcar's failure:

 

I'm not surprised at all by this post.  I was expecting more people to jump on this situation. 

 

That said, DC needs to stop ruining things for the rest of us.  Just because they're completely incapable of operating a transit system doesn't mean the rest of the country is as inept.  I'm completely livid about their entire sad state of affairs.  How the heck do you screw up a streetcar project THAT much!?!

Should streetcar operator details be public?

 

As Cincinnati City Council prepares to pick the company that will operate the streetcar, Councilman David Mann is demanding transparency – which is lacking right now.

 

The Southwest Ohio Regional Transit Authority, which is in charge of running the streetcar, will score applicants on four criteria: price, quality of the applicant, staffing and technical quality. But instead of presenting all the information to Cincinnati City Council – which is tasked with choosing the company – the SORTA plans only to present the two highest scoring applicants and the cost.

 

"I reject the appropriateness of this kind of secrecy when an elected body exercises its oversight responsibilities," Mann wrote in a statement attached the motion. "Nor can it be defended when such enormous levels of public funds are being spent. Early attention and a report by the administration is vital."

 

Cont

All Aboard Ohio ‏@AllAboardOhio  11s11 seconds ago

Cincinnati Council majority urge city's staff to ID all $$ for planning, construction of Uptown #streetcar extension

Is the $54 million the state pulled enough to finish the uptown segment? IS it true there is an underground  water main and electrical system under  vine street that will cost $100 million alone to move?

Is the $54 million the state pulled enough to finish the uptown segment? IS it true there is an underground  water main and electrical system under  vine street that will cost $100 million alone to move?

 

^ I hope so, because it's crummy alignment.

Then what should it be John? 

Then what should it be John? 

 

Needs to run north of 12th on Walnut and Main to the face of Mt. Auburn and then through a series of tunnels, daylighting behind Christ Hospital and ending up on Auburn Avenue to Corry to Jefferson. Way more money, but way better performance.

That, or the forest route West of Vine.

That, or the forest route West of Vine.

 

It's an alternative, but you miss Christ Hospital and the heart of Mt. Auburn.

The forest moon of Endor? 

If the water main is truly an issue for Vine St, wouldn't the most logical secondary option be W. Clifton? That route would cut through the very dense CUF neighborhood, which I think could generate a lot of ridership, particularly with UC students. It seems W. Clifton also would make for relatively easy spurs north to Ludlow and east to Walnut Hills. Wouldn't CUF and UC be a better hilltop destination than Mt. Auburn? I think whatever route that goes to Uptown has to eventually hit the medical complex, but in terms of getting up the hill, I don't think W. Clifton is a bad option at all.

I like the idea of a long distance, grade separated light rail line.

 

But, I don’t see the political will for it. Not on the state and federal levels. In fact, getting into conspiracy theory territory here, but I see the state government as eager to strangle urban growth in Ohio in order to prevent it from becoming a bluer state, with a lock on power until the next census redistricting comes along. 

 

That being said, does anyone at all see merit in my idea for the extension to Corry Street as planned, with a tie in to a high frequency circulator bus system? Financially, you save money by going with the existing rail plan.  Politically, you could line up a lot of inner neighborhoods behind the idea, since it serves multiple neighborhoods instead of just one destination. You can take away some critics' ammo since it involves buses.  And, you wouldn't have to convince outer neighborhoods why they should want transit in the first place.  Transportation wise, you could convert some existing bus routes into expresses or rapids, with connection points to the circulator system, improving existing service.  (For example, routes could connect to the circulator system at the transit hub planned for Northside, and continue downtown as an express instead of traversing Uptown.) But I would leave that part to the experts.

 

(ICYMI: The Uptown Four circulator lines details are here http://goo.gl/awheu8  They could have off-board fare payment like the streetcar, with the same fare structure as the streetcar ($1 for 2 hours,) and free transfer between them (including the streetcar line.)  The frequency would be high- 10 minutes or less between vehicles- and service hours per day would be long.)

 

I don't think it's incompatible with the  idea of a full light rail line and Mt. Auburn tunnel, I just think that that idea may be further in the future while this could improve transit in the near future.

 

I'm not saying my idea is perfect and couldn’t be improved upon, route-wise or other wise.  But it seems the rail people don't care for this idea and the bus people, a small and soft spoken group to be sure, don’t want to reveal their future plans for expanding service. From one end of the general public online comment spectrum I've heard "If it's not rail, it doesn't spark development at all" and from the other I've heard "boondoggle!"  But I'd like to know why such an idea would be unfeasible or inadequate from a transit system perspective. If the streetcar as a downtown circulator has value, wouldn’t there be value in these neighborhood circulators as well? Wouldn’t it be a huge bonus if they all connected at a single point?

 

If the water main is truly an issue for Vine St, wouldn't the most logical secondary option be W. Clifton? That route would cut through the very dense CUF neighborhood, which I think could generate a lot of ridership, particularly with UC students. It seems W. Clifton also would make for relatively easy spurs north to Ludlow and east to Walnut Hills. Wouldn't CUF and UC be a better hilltop destination than Mt. Auburn? I think whatever route that goes to Uptown has to eventually hit the medical complex, but in terms of getting up the hill, I don't think W. Clifton is a bad option at all.

 

I think in a previous study W Clifton scored highly but was hurt by steep grade and higher cost than Vine...  But I agree with your sentiments.  http://www.cincinnati-oh.gov/streetcar/linkservid/252AD3BF-5298-4C97-A76EC7131F1A35AF/showMeta/0/

 

 

I think large tunnels are a pipe dream. I can't see the political climate in Cincinnati ever getting behind the extra cost. I'm supportive of Vine. The old Rothenberg School site at Vine and Mulberry has huge potential for development. And traffic on Vine is almost never an issue. Tunneling under the hill is not important if traffic doesn't back up. I would rather spend money on a tunnel underneath Taft/McMillan to avoid that series of lights that could slow down a ride.

Vice Mayor Mann: End streetcar secrecy

 

As Cincinnati City Council prepares to help pick the company that will operate the streetcar, Vice Mayor David Mann is demanding transparency – which he says is lacking from the regional transit authority.

 

The Southwest Ohio Regional Transit Authority, in charge of overseeing streetcar operations, is in the process of receiving proposals from private firms interested in running the system daily.

 

SORTA will score applicants on four criteria: price, quality of the applicant, staffing and technical quality. But instead of presenting all the information to City Council – which is tasked with signing off on the company chosen – SORTA plans only to present the two highest-scoring applicants and their cost proposals, Mann said.

 

Cont

Then what should it be John? 

 

Needs to run north of 12th on Walnut and Main to the face of Mt. Auburn and then through a series of tunnels, daylighting behind Christ Hospital and ending up on Auburn Avenue to Corry to Jefferson. Way more money, but way better performance.

 

I could see a light rail tunnel being built eventually, but I think the best bet for now is to expand the streetcar system. The streetcar system should focus on circulating people around urban neighborhoods and encouraging new development in those neighborhoods. The light rail system can focus on being as fast as possible and bringing people from other neighborhoods into the core. I think we should build our system with this dual network in mind, rather than trying to build one single network that attempts to serve both purposes simultaneously. Therefore, I would prefer we build the streetcar extension up Vine Street as planned. Eventually we can build the Mt. Auburn tunnel for light rail and hook into the existing Main/Walnut tracks downtown. Or, we might decide that a better option for light rail is a east-west line in the subway tunnel, continuing along I-75 or I-74 on the west side, and up Reading Road to the east.

 

Unless John knows something I don't. With Cranley as mayor potentially until 2021, OKI leadership pushing for highway expansion and attempting to squash any additional transit investment, Uptown Consortium only caring about the MLK corridor and new I-71 interchange, zero chance of Ohio giving any significant amount of money to transit, SORTA and city staff trying to get their work done without ruffling any feathers, and NKY leaders silent on the topic... I don't know where a light rail plan could even come from.

Then what should it be John? 

 

Needs to run north of 12th on Walnut and Main to the face of Mt. Auburn and then through a series of tunnels, daylighting behind Christ Hospital and ending up on Auburn Avenue to Corry to Jefferson. Way more money, but way better performance.

 

Zero Zero Zero chance this would ever happen.  Negative chance, if that were a thing. 

I think people are overlooking that as soon as the streetcar begins operating there will be people wanting it to be extended to their neighborhoods.  You will not see people who were on the fence say it's a bad idea.  The only directions minds will change is from skeptical or indifferent to favorable.  This will reduce the sentiment that the streetcar project, and any possible expansion, are somehow going to bankrupt the city. 

 

There is risk associated with tunnel proposals since costs can escalate rapidly.  Opponents will line up examples of drastic cost escalations and TBM mishaps such as the one still unfolding in Seattle (never mind that that is a highway tunnel, and that three light rail TBM's just dug a 3-mile tunnel without incident).  In Baltimore the red line light rail's price increased (exploded?!) because they are going to double-track a suburban tunnel rather than do a single-track section.  Also the downtown section of that line will now be dug 25 feet deeper than originally planned and budgeted for. 

 

But these opponents will ignore the many recent light rail tunnels that have come in on-time and on-budget like Minneapolis, LA, Portland, St. Louis, Seattle, Pittsburgh, etc. 

 

^I think that's what's going to be the best aspect of the first phase finishing. Nearby neighborhoods all clamoring for extensions. "We're just a couple stops away!" is going to be said by so many places and they'll push for expansions in all directions hopefully.

I am not quite so optimistic. There is this huge physical disconnect between the basin and the rest of town, especially uptown, which should be as closely woven to downtown as possible. To me this is all set up to be a showdown. If you want rail with useful stop locations, a tunnel is the only way to go.

 

In fact, I'd go so far as to say that all of this is really about, has always been about, the tunnel.

I am not quite so optimistic. There is this huge physical disconnect between the basin and the rest of town, especially uptown, which should be as closely woven to downtown as possible. To me this is all set up to be a showdown. If you want rail with useful stop locations, a tunnel is the only way to go.

 

In fact, I'd go so far as to say that all of this is really about, has always been about, the tunnel.

 

The first postwar line a city builds should not have many compromises, especially if that line will be the "trunk" of a larger system.  If we had been able to cash in the state grant we were awarded in 2010 to build the Vine St. line for "free", well then it made sense, even though that routing would have diminished the performance of a larger system. 

 

But people forget that the system we are building right now was the design that was arrived at when it was thought that the streetcar would be a completely city-funded project within the basin.  The "Phase 1b" was an adjunct to the system that had already been designed and mostly funded.  If "Phase 1" had included a link to uptown, it's unlikely that the "Phase 1a" routing that is currently being constructed would have been arrived at.

 

 

What is a realistic scenario, in terms of time frame and financing, that the tunnel option could be constructed given that there is no help coming from OKI/state of Ohio?

What is a realistic scenario, in terms of time frame and financing, that the tunnel option could be constructed given that there is no help coming from OKI/state of Ohio?

 

The question is actually how much more does this cost to build and operate than Phase 1b up the Vine St. hill. The circa-2010 estimate of $50 million included two streetcars.  If a tunnel route also terminating at Corry St. costs $150 million, then it costs 3X.  If it costs $250 million then it's 5X.  But if we take either of those figures and consider them in the context of a much larger system, that difference becomes a less significant percentage. 

 

Also, the time advantage that a tunnel promises means each branch feeding into it might maintain the same level of service with one fewer streetcar.  Assuming three branches, then the savings include not just a somewhat smaller fleet, but much, much lower labor costs. 2-3 fewer full-time drivers per branch (each streetcar requires 120~ hours of operation per week) plus wear and maintenance on fewer vehicles. 

 

The critics never complain about the on-time and on-budget tunnel projects like the Minneapolis airport tunnel, which is significantly longer than one we would build here, but built in more predictable soil conditions so much less expensive per foot:

http://www.hatchmott.com/projects/minnesota-lrt-tunnel-and-airport-station

 

 

 

How long would our tunnels be? It looks like the Minneappolis ones were about a mile and a half.

How long would our tunnels be? It looks like the Minneappolis ones were about a mile and a half.

 

 

The tunnel that was briefly studied by Parsons-Brinkerhoff in the late 1990s was going to be about 5,500 feet long and connect Main St. at E. Clifton with Corry St. at Jefferson Ave. (would have surfaced in the strip of grass between Jefferson Ave. and UC's sports bubble).  There was a subway station planned deep beneath Auburn Ave. at Christ Hospital.  A shorter tunnel of about 4,000 feet on that same alignment could connect that same OTR portal and surface on Auburn Ave. a few blocks north of Christ Hospital, but the tunnel would be steeply graded and a surface station for the hospital would be far enough from it to discourage some ridership. 

So then what's the road map forward toward a larger system given an unwilling mayor, county commission, OKI, state, and Metro who is 'bus only' at this point? Or do we just hang tight with the starter line until some point in the future when the political landscape changes. I see the benefits of the tunnel plan, I'm just looking for someone to put forth an actionable plan to get it off the drawing board.

 

Also the $52 million price tag included the Fountain Sq-Banks leg at the time so Uptown wasn't the entire cost.